Military pilot Jo Ellis said she had to hire private armed security for her family because of the false claims, which went viral on social media.
A transgender military pilot filed a defamation lawsuit Wednesday against a conservative influencer who falsely claimed on social media that she was flying the helicopter that collided with a commercial jet near Reagan National Airport in January, killing 67 people.
“I want to hold this person accountable for what they did to me,” Jo Ellis, a pilot who has served more than 15 years in the Virginia Army National Guard, said in a statement to NBC News. “It’s become too common that people can say horrible things about someone, profit at their expense, and get away with it.”
On Jan. 30, less than 24 hours after the crash, conservative influencer Matt Wallace, who has 2.2 million followers on the social media platform X, shared a post from another account he operates stating that the helicopter pilot was transgender, according to the lawsuit. Wallace included a photo of Ellis, and the post went viral, the lawsuit states.
they should make this guy famous as the influencer who tries to defame the US military, give him a taste of his own medicine
Soon after Ellis’ statement on Facebook, Wallace shared another X user’s post with Ellis’ video, writing that it was an “Important Update!” and adding that Ellis was not piloting the helicopter and is still alive. Wallace also wrote in another X post that the original rumor that Ellis had been flying the helicopter involved in the crash came from another account with the handle @FakeGayPolitics, which is no longer active. Wallace said the rumor “seemed credible” because Ellis, whom Wallace misgendered in his posts, “wrote an article calling out Trump’s trans military ban only a few days ago.”
How does this logic work in his head?
No logic needs to be involved when the only goal is to ruin the lives of marginalized people.
“if someone said anything negative about me, I would gladly murder dozens of people JUST to make them look bad, therefore this is perfectly believable!”
That’s the logic.
I think their tiny-Trumpy-brained syllogism goes:
- Trans people bad.
- Helicopter crash bad.
- Therefore, trans people helicopter.
Premise 1 is false, but other than that you simply can’t fault the logic.
Yea unfortunately probably not his is but more like his followers’ are. He is aware enough of this to exploit it for his own gain. The thing to do is to have obligatory critical thinking courses each semester every year from age six to twenty two, repeat it so many times it becomes a reflex not a choice.
trans people helicopter.
“I identify as-”
Yeah goddamn I bet that made perfect sense in his head.
I wish them great success. Not only were they greatly wronged, which could cost future jobs, but in the rush for clicks, too many streamers think that freedom of speech also means free from the consequences of their words. That needs to change
Her, and “was she”… but good on you for not being hateful!
It’s my go-to way of speaking to people now too. I will either use just their name or use non gender pronouns. I figure I will avoid misgendering by not gendering.
For the better part of 30 years I have used a non-gendered language when possible. I was elated to find that “they” was originally, 13th century, a single pronoun instead of plural. I have probably used “one” way more times than is healthy.
~30 years ago I was living in/near Hillcrest, San Diego. Gay, trans, drag and everything else. I was online and people’s genders were frequently unknown. In 1993 we already had the issues that On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog.. Now we have AI which has no gender pronoun, I’m voting for “hal”.
Point is that avoiding gendering text has been and will continue to be the safer option for general purpose writing. Some people will get bent out of shape that you didn’t use gender specific language because the Narcissism of Small Differences means they must see you as the enemy even if you agree with them on 99% of things. Trying to have a generally non-discriminatory pronoun policy? That’s a paddling. Your good intentions must be stopped because they aren’t pure enough.
It sucks. Instead of focusing on the slander used by hate speech and the remediation sought by the one who was wronged we are totally lost in the weeds and focused on if we used the right three letters because avoiding the wrong three wasn’t enough. It’s thought police with the best of intentions but it’s still thought police.
Point is that avoiding gendering text has been and will continue to be the safer option for general purpose writing.
I do the same, but if someone’s gender is known it’s really not hard to use one of their preferred pronouns.
I don’t think that’s being the ‘thought police’ and it’s certainly not something to focus on instead of hate speech, we can do both.
Uhm. Hey, I know you are well meaning and I’m only saying this to inform, not to call out, shame or attack.
But most trans people deeply dislike what you’re doing, it’s called degendering and it’s not an appropriate or respectful way to refer to us.
I understand you are worried about saying the wrong thing, but this is a way to deny trans people their identity but talking around it. It’s extremely noticeable and as someone who has attended more than a few trans support groups, it’s dehumanizing and upsetting. Just as non-binary folk use they/them, binary trans folk use she and him. We have one correct way to refer to us, and apart from sentance where you are referring to a group, “they” is not a safe one size fits all.
Again, I say this respectfully in effort to inform. You seem well intending, but I implore you to reconsider.
Like I replied below,
Then we can’t win, it feels like people are purposely making it impossible to be respectful to everyone by always having an issue. So I will go with offending the gendered people.
If y’all gonna have a problem with using neutral terms then you will have to live with being offended because it’s not fair if we can’t just use your name.
“It feels like people are purposely making it impossible to be respectful to everyone…” Yeah by ignoring simple social cues (or a written article) that would have allowed them to correctly and respectfully refer to another person, if they would have had the energy to allow a single additional neuron to fire off in there.
“…I will go with offending the gendered people.” You know everyone here can see your previous posts right? Where you correctly gender Trump, Musk, and probably every other cicgendered person without having any trouble. But nice edgy touch…
I’m not talking to them in person, and they are not ambiguous. I was speaking from the point of not knowing the person on a level where it is public knowledge or personal knowledge. Nice try, trying to make this a personal attack.
I wasn’t trying to start a flame war, honestly. It was just clear from the post that “she” was a “she/her”
You don’t need to ‘other’ people who aren’t requesting it. Do no harm.
They/them feels just as wrong to some people with gendered identities as some people with non-binary identities feel with gendered pronouns. Especially if they are trans and binary, because it takes a lot to get to the point that people will correctly gender you.
What I’m saying is, you might feel like you’re not misgendering, but if someone is binary and you use a non-binary pronoun, you are misgendering.
Strong disagree. Using ‘they/them’ when you’re generally unsure about a person’s gender isn’t misgendering.
I’m a binary trans woman. If someone is generally unsure about my gender, because it can be ambiguous from time to time, they/them when referring to me is perfectly acceptable. I would suggest most other people are fine with they/them in this instance as well.
Pronouns can be quite a minefield to navigate, especially for those not used to using they/them when all they’ve ever known is binary terms growing up.
Speaking as an ‘elder’ trans person, some pronouns in use, which are just as valid as mine!, are genuinely difficult to remember because there are so many of them. I’m talking about the ones that aren’t part of the English language in common use. I default to ‘they/them’ in those instances because using the person’s assigned gender at birth would be genuinely hurtful; I don’t want to hurt someone.
I feel very much that our own, gender diverse, community is driving those outside of it away by being so strict with/overt policing of pronouns, that those who aren’t gender diverse find the whole ‘pronoun’ thing too complicated, then either refuse to engage with us or deliberately misgender because its easier. This is especially true for older conservative cis people.
they/them when referring to me is perfectly acceptable
Thank you for stating your own personal preference. I’ll try to make a note of it.
But … is that automatically anyone else’s preference? My friend Sandra prefers she/her, and rejects the they/them as it’s apparently confusing.
I’d ask the two of you to figure it out but its not my business.
But … is that automatically anyone else’s preference?
No, and that’s the really hard part. Most would agree that ‘they/them/they’re’ (and so on) is generally safer than a gendered pronoun if unsure. It’s also really hard when someone’s pronouns, again for those in the back: are just as valid as mine, aren’t ones in common use.
There’s a non-exhaustive list here: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2022/08/incomplete-list-gender-pronouns/
It’s much easier with friends, as you’ll generally get into a groove eventually. However, is less so with strangers.
Even asking someone’s pronouns could be met with confused looks from time to time. Context matters. If I asked for the pronouns of a farmer with a thousand yard stare and sun-kissed leather skin to match in my part of the world, despite growing up in the country, I’d probably be punched in the face. 😂
Yeah as you can see this is all a confusing minefield, can’t blame people for using the safe choice, they-them.
I literally said “some people”, because there are certainly some who don’t care if people call them “they”. Like I straight up acknowledged that in my first sentence. My point was that it isn’t going to jive with everyone, and that maybe people should reconsider that safety blanket of “non gendering”.
How is “just using they/them for everyone” not “misgendering because it’s easier”? Because asking someone what their preferred pronouns are is too hard for many
What I’m saying is, you might feel like you’re not misgendering, but if someone is binary and you use a non-binary pronoun, you are misgendering.
I don’t disagree with your first statement.
However I do disagree with your second statement, quoted above, because it’s so broad that even people trying to do the right thing, or least harmful thing, can be accused of misgendering or be policed by others for simply trying to be inclusive.
Whilst a technicality, it really rubs non-gender diverse people the wrong way, and makes it harder for gender diverse people, myself included, to drive broader acceptance of us in the community when all we’re known for is telling others they’re ‘wrong’ when they accidentally mess up a pronoun or three.
There’s a very fine balance to be struck between being inclusive, and being correct.
If someone gets a person’s gender wrong accidentally because they were unsure, that shouldn’t, and doesn’t in my view, count as misgendering simply because it was a misunderstanding.
However if someone deliberately, or maliciously refers to someone as their assigned gender at birth, that’s misgendering which should absolutely be called out and derided.
Its true, some people are super sensitive and look for reasons to be offended, its best to just avoid them rather then placate that type of person. Its not really about pronoun usage.
It literally is about prounons. It’s super shitty to dismiss another’s identity because you found it troublesome to respect the correct way to address them.
If someone tells me to use a certain pronoun I will, but my default has been “they” for a long time now. Gendered pronouns in general are a terrible idea, linguistically at the very least.
So if I’m not sure don’t use pronouns?
Then we can’t win, it feels like people are purposely making it impossible to be respectful to everyone by always having an issue. So I will go with offending the gendered people.
I don’t believe gendering ever has, or ever will be, required for communicating in the English language. Regardless of my personal beliefs regarding trans people, which are still unknown, I ask you to convince me otherwise.
I’m one of those people that prefers to have my name used instead of she/her or they/them, and it works quite well once people shake the cobwebs off their brains.
However, living your life as “he” while knowing you are “she” is full of moments that hurt. The English language may not require the distinction, but in practice it is how we define people. Why would you continue to hurt someone by using a pronoun that isn’t what they’ve described themselves as? It’s like someone who has gotten your name wrong, and no matter how often you correct them, they continue to call you the wrong name. Except it isn’t just one person, it’s a class of people that is filled with both those that hate your existence and those who refuse to understand it.
Removed by mod
Because it’s just going to make them more popular. One can argue that the failed assassination of Trump was actually key to his victory. Or if that’s not clear enough, look at what happened with Charlie Hebdo - it just made muslims look petty and violent to the point where most people would rather side with the paper that was bullying a religious minority than recognize their concerns.
Losing a lawsuit, meanwhile, makes them unpopular and poor at the same time.
the paper that was bullying a religious minority than recognize their concerns
Shut the fuck up with your disgusting justification.
Islam is the second most popular religion in France after Catholicism (11% vs 25% in 2020 and things have almost certainly shifted further in favor of Islam since).
This is how Charlie Hebdo presents and presented the Catholic majority:
https://www.google.com/search?udm=2&q=charlie+hebdo+catholiques
Charlie Hebdo’s crime wasn’t “bullying a minority”, their crime was treating France’s second strongest religious group no different than their strongest.
You should watch the apprentice. Losing law suites is how Trump started his cult
Because killing people is wrong and can very very easily get out of hand. Consider the French revolution
I’m starting to wonder if we’re going to get killed while we scream how wrong it is.
And the solution is not to kill people who say awful things.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
The French Revolution that was massively successful in removing scum from the country?
Yeah I’m considering it alright. :)
I’m not sure I would call it successful in the long (or even medium) term given the events that directly followed…
I’m not sure I would call it successful in the long (or even medium) term given the events that directly followed…
Based on a study of your usage of Lemmy, I’m not sure you are capable of having any ideas that are sure.
You came along to one of my messages and said “What a sad, pathetic waste of time this comment was” just a few minutes ago. I think you are here to promote anti-intellectualism on Lemmy media systems.
The French Revolution that was massively successful in removing scum from the country?
I think it promoted anti-intellectualism and violence, which many people in April 2025 on electric media systems of Twitter, Lemmy, Mastodon, Bluesky, Reddit, TikTok, Fox News HDTV, CNN HDTV seem to adore. The idea of killing and murdering human beings they disagree with, the machine powers of guns and weapons to dehumanize others.
::: ______________
“There is something wrong with our world, something fundamentally and basically wrong. I don’t think we have to look too far to see that. I’m sure that most of you would agree with me in making that assertion. And when we stop to analyze the cause of our world’s ills, many things come to mind. We begin to wonder if it is due to the fact that we don’t know enough. But it can’t be that. Because in terms of accumulated knowledge we know more today than men have known in any period of human history. We have the facts at our disposal. We know more about mathematics, about science, about social science, and philosophy than we’ve ever known in any period of the world’s history. So it can’t be because we don’t know enough. And then we wonder if it is due to the fact that our scientific genius lags behind. That is, if we have not made enough progress scientifically. Well then, it can’t be that. For our scientific progress over the past years has been amazing. Man through his scientific genius has been able to dwarf distance and place time in chains, so that today it’s possible to eat breakfast in New York City and supper in London, England. Back in about 1753 it took a letter three days to go from New York City to Washington, and today you can go from here to China in less time than that. It can’t be because man is stagnant in his scientific progress. Man’s scientific genius has been amazing. I think we have to look much deeper than that if we are to find the real cause of man’s problems and the real cause of the world’s ills today. If we are to really find it I think we will have to look in the hearts and souls of men.”
Get that bank girl 💸
Take fucking everything from this chode.
Of course it’s Matt fucking Wallace
